Journals →  Gornyi Zhurnal →  2022 →  #9 →  Back

ArticleName Seismicity of blasting operations in Karelia
DOI 10.17580/gzh.2022.09.06
ArticleAuthor Zueva I. A., Lebedev A. A.

Institute of Geology, Karelia Science Center, Russian Academy of Sciences, Petrozavodsk, Russia:

I. A. Zueva, Junior Researcher,
A. A. Lebedev, Senior Engineer–Geophysicist


Modern changes in the Earth’s crust take place under the joint influence of the natural tectonic forces and the progressive anthropogenic activity. The induced type of seismicity prevails in the territory of Karelia, which mainly includes active blasting operations. The study of blasting-induced seismicity is relevant considering numerous industrial facilities present in the territory of Karelia (construction and operation of large structures, roads, pipelines, hydroelectric power plants, etc.). Based on the seismic data obtained in 2018–2019, the induced seismicity map is built and the time characteristics of the blasting operations performed are analyzed. The purpose of the study is to assess the level of seismicity induced by blasting operations in Karelia. In the early 2000s, the seismological network was created in the territory of the Republic by the Institute of Geology, Karelia Science Center RAS. The network is equipped with modern digital equipment that allows seismic monitoring of the whole territory of Karelia. The layout of epicenters of the induced events recorded in Karelia is presented. A brief description of the mining activity is given together with its reflections in the seismic record for each region. The time profiles of the blasting operations were built. The studied seismicity comes out at 4:00-18:00 (UTC). Most blasting operations in Karelia are carried out at 9:00-11:00 (UTC). A fewer seismic events are recorded in summer than in winter, and the number of seismic events exceeds 300 per year. The observations show that the blasting-induced seismicity is recorded in many regions of Karelia. The western part of the region is characterized by more frequent and stronger events than the eastern part.
The study was carried out within the framework of Topic No. 213: 3D Model of the Lithosphere of Karelia Based on the Geological and Geophysical Data, No. АААА-А18-118020290086-1.

keywords Karelia, earthquakes, quarry, induced seismicity, commercial blasts, magnitude, focus time, seismic station

1. Shchiptsov V. V. Economic minerals of Karelia. Gornyi Zhurnal. 2019. No. 3. pp. 16–20. DOI: 10.17580/gzh.2019.03.03.
2. Adushkin V. V., Malovichko A. A. (Eds.). Blasts and earthquakes on the European part of Russia. Moscow : GEOS, 2013. 382 p.

3. Kozyrev A. A., Savchenko S. N., Panin V. I., Semenova I. E., Rybin V. V. et al. Geomechanical processes in the geological environment of geotechnical systems and geodynamic risk management. Apatity : KNTs RAN, 2019. 431 p.
4. Adushkin V. V., Ayzberg R. E., Aronov A. G., Aronova T. I., Asming V. E. et al. Earthquakes and microseismicity in modern geodynamics problems on the East European Platform. Petrozavodsk : Karelskiy nauchnyi tsentr RAN, 2007. Book 1. Earthquakes. 381 p.
5. Klimovskiy A. V., Meshcheryakova V. A., Lebedev A. A. Dynamic features of “Petrozavodsk” seismic station. Trudy Karelskogo nauchnogo tsentra Rossiyskoy akademii nauk. Ser.: Geologiya dokembriya. 2016. No. 2. pp. 105–111.
6. Zueva I. A., Lebedev A. A. The characteristic features of the seismic records of the industrial explosions in the Kostomuksha iron ore deposit according to the Karelian seismic network. Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser.: Geologiya. 2017. No. 2. pp. 133–141.
7. Zueva I. A., Lebedev A. A. Seismic effect of industrial explosions of GOK Kostomuksha. Vestnik MGTU. Trudy Murmanskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta. 2020. Vol. 23, No. 1. pp. 22–28.
8. Asming V. E. Automatic seismic record processing software EL. Geophysical Testing Procedure and Facilities : Collection of Scientific Papers. Murmansk, 1997. pp. 125–132.
9. Asming V. E., Kremenetskaya E. O., Vinogradov Yu. A., Evtyugina Z. A. Criteria of explosions and earthquakes identification for estimation of seismic danger of the region. Vestnik MGTU. Trudy Murmanskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta. 2010. Vol. 13, No. 4-2. pp. 998–1007.
10. Kortström J., Uski M., Tiira T. Automatic classification of seismic events within a regional seismograph netw ork. Computers & Geosciences. 2016. Vol. 87. pp. 22–30.
11. O’Rourke C. T., Eli Baker G., Sheehan A. F. Using P/S Amplitude Ratios for Seismic Discrimination at Local Distances. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. 2016. Vol. 106, No. 5. pp. 2320–2331.
12. Ataeva G., Gitterman Y., Shapira A. The ratio between corner frequencies of source spectra of P- and S-waves—A new discriminant between earthquakes and quarry blasts. Journal of Seismology. 2017. Vol. 21. pp. 209–220.
13. Kintner J. A., Ammon C. J., Homman K., Nyblade A. Precise Relative Magnitude and Relative Location Estimates of Low‐Yield Industrial Blasts in Pennsylvania. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. 2020. Vol. 110, No. 1. pp. 226–240.
14. Wang R., Schmandt B., Kiser E. Seismic Discrimination of Controlled Explosions and Earthquakes Near Mount St. Helens Using P/S Ratios. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth. 2020. Vol. 125. Iss. 10. DOI: 10.1029/2020JB020338
15. Tyupin V. N. Geomechanical behavior of jointed rock mass in the large-scale blast impact zone. Eurasian Mining. 2020. No. 2. pp. 11–14. DOI: 10.17580/em.2020.02.03
16. Ivashchenko V. Geology, geochemistry and mineralogy of indium resources at Pitkäranta Mining District, Ladoga Karelia, Russia. Journal of Geochemical Exploration. 2022. Vol. 240. 107046. DOI: 10.1016/j.gexplo.2022.107046

Language of full-text russian
Full content Buy